AuthorTopic: Bob Dylan! (Read 65658 times)

In this month's Mojo two people (one of the guys from Penn & Teller, and Beverley Martyn) chose a Bob Dylan LP as their favourite record. Nothing too strange in that until you discover that they were 'Tempest' (2012) and 'Infidels' (1983) respectively.

Now I'm all for an appreciation (not TOO BIG an appreciation) of Dylan's career, but are these choices down to respecting the guy's career rather than actually thinking that a 1983 Bob Dylan LP could actually be his best album or even the best album ever?

I've noticed in those Uncut/Mojo Specials that anyone with a long career always has classic records liberally spread across their career, almost as a justification for the magazine itself, but surely Dylan's worst LP of the 60s (which these magazines might lead you to think would be the 1st LP, Another Side or Nashville Skyline) wipes the floor with Oh Mercy or Time Out Of Mind or Infidels or Tempest?

Logged

nimrod

In this month's Mojo two people (one of the guys from Penn & Teller, and Beverley Martyn) chose a Bob Dylan LP as their favourite record. Nothing too strange in that until you discover that they were 'Tempest' (2012) and 'Infidels' (1983) respectively.

Now I'm all for an appreciation (not TOO BIG an appreciation) of Dylan's career, but are these choices down to respecting the guy's career rather than actually thinking that a 1983 Bob Dylan LP could actually be his best album or even the best album ever?

I've noticed in those Uncut/Mojo Specials that anyone with a long career always has classic records liberally spread across their career, almost as a justification for the magazine itself, but surely Dylan's worst LP of the 60s (which these magazines might lead you to think would be the 1st LP, Another Side or Nashville Skyline) wipes the floor with Oh Mercy or Time Out Of Mind or Infidels or Tempest?

In this month's Mojo two people (one of the guys from Penn & Teller, and Beverley Martyn) chose a Bob Dylan LP as their favourite record. Nothing too strange in that until you discover that they were 'Tempest' (2012) and 'Infidels' (1983) respectively.

Now I'm all for an appreciation (not TOO BIG an appreciation) of Dylan's career, but are these choices down to respecting the guy's career rather than actually thinking that a 1983 Bob Dylan LP could actually be his best album or even the best album ever?

I've noticed in those Uncut/Mojo Specials that anyone with a long career always has classic records liberally spread across their career, almost as a justification for the magazine itself, but surely Dylan's worst LP of the 60s (which these magazines might lead you to think would be the 1st LP, Another Side or Nashville Skyline) wipes the floor with Oh Mercy or Time Out Of Mind or Infidels or Tempest?

I quite like Infidels. At the time it was seen as Dylan recovering from his Christian period. Sweetheart Like You and Jokerman still stand up to me. But I think it's hard to beat Blonde on Blonde, Highway 61 Revisited, John Wesley Harding, Blood on the Tracks etc

I get the music being subjective line, but I'm sticking to the opinion that the 60s LPs win on every single level (including design and how the LPs were actually made) over the post-60s material with, I'm prepared to acknowledge, the exception of Blood On The Tracks.

In some bizarre marking system one of the 'specials' gave Oh Mercy, and its awful production, 5-stars, while Nashville Skyline was given 3-stars. Yeah, right, of course!

In this month's Mojo two people (one of the guys from Penn & Teller, and Beverley Martyn) chose a Bob Dylan LP as their favourite record. Nothing too strange in that until you discover that they were 'Tempest' (2012) and 'Infidels' (1983) respectively.

Now I'm all for an appreciation (not TOO BIG an appreciation) of Dylan's career, but are these choices down to respecting the guy's career rather than actually thinking that a 1983 Bob Dylan LP could actually be his best album or even the best album ever?

I've noticed in those Uncut/Mojo Specials that anyone with a long career always has classic records liberally spread across their career, almost as a justification for the magazine itself, but surely Dylan's worst LP of the 60s (which these magazines might lead you to think would be the 1st LP, Another Side or Nashville Skyline) wipes the floor with Oh Mercy or Time Out Of Mind or Infidels or Tempest?

A good album is a good album, regardless of the year and decade it was released in. I was told that Paul McCartney stopped making relevant music in the 80's. Bought Chaos and Creation In The Backyard and it has became one of my favourite albums ever, an by-the-book example of how a legend in his 60's should approach music-making. Perfectly adequate, not forced in the slightest, highly emotional. Who cares if the album didn't have much impact on the contemporary musical scene? An album doesn't have to start a revolution in order to be great.

Too many people are too obsessed with the little rules and criterias critics and magazines tried to attach to rock 'n' roll. Music ain't got no rules, that's what makes it great. It may be absurd that Paul McCartney or any other dinosaur can kick so much ass at this age, but such is reality, imperfect and unexpected. There is no book of rules saying that he should stop making music after he reached his peak. Likewise, Chaos and Creation doesn't diminish in the least his great work with The Beatles, or the rest of his solo career. It's all great music, listen and stop over-analyzing. In my opinion.

A good album is a good album, regardless of the year and decade it was released in. I was told that Paul McCartney stopped making relevant music in the 80's. Bought Chaos and Creation In The Backyard and it has became one of my favourite albums ever, an by-the-book example of how a legend in his 60's should approach music-making. Perfectly adequate, not forced in the slightest, highly emotional. Who cares if the album didn't have much impact on the contemporary musical scene? An album doesn't have to start a revolution in order to be great.

Too many people are too obsessed with the little rules and criterias critics and magazines tried to attach to rock 'n' roll. Music ain't got no rules, that's what makes it great. It may be absurd that Paul McCartney or any other dinosaur can kick so much ass at this age, but such is reality, imperfect and unexpected. There is no book of rules saying that he should stop making music after he reached his peak. Likewise, Chaos and Creation doesn't diminish in the least his great work with The Beatles, or the rest of his solo career. It's all great music, listen and stop over-analyzing. In my opinion.

Good points Ovi. I'd say similarly about George's Brainwashed. Certainly ranks ahead of most of his solo albums and more enjoyable than quite a bit of his Beatle work.

'Perfectly adequate' eh? I'm playing Eddie Cochran at the moment and I hope he'll never be described as 'perfectly adequate'!

I'd say the over analysis lays more with those who persevere with stuff that plainly is not as good as the 50s/60s material.'Chaos' was fine (the cover photograph was great), but I'd suggest it has lay dormant in most people's collections for at least five years. Knowing I wouldn't ever listen to it again I actually gave my copy and its attendant singles (all bought on the day of release) to the charity shop. It's not that's it's bad, like Infidels and the like it's just not particularly exciting. It's, as you say, perfectly adequate.

'Perfectly adequate' eh? I'm playing Eddie Cochran at the moment and I hope he'll never be described as 'perfectly adequate'!

I'd say the over analysis lays more with those who persevere with stuff that plainly is not as good as the 50s/60s material.'Chaos' was fine (the cover photograph was great), but I'd suggest it has lay dormant in most people's collections for at least five years. Knowing I wouldn't ever listen to it again I actually gave my copy and its attendant singles (all bought on the day of release) to the charity shop. It's not that's it's bad, like Infidels and the like it's just not particularly exciting. It's, as you say, perfectly adequate.

I think it can depend on whether you're talking about albums that you're going to sit down and listen to all the way through or individual songs. Sure given the choice I'll usually put on a Beatles album versus a whole Macca or George. Similarly I'd spin John Wesley Harding rather than Empire Burlesque. But, on the other hand, at the level of individual songs I'd put Calico Sky by Macca on a playlist rather than Rocky Racoon, George's Vatican Blues rather than Blue Jay Way or Dylan's Dark Eyes before The Ballad of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest.

Fair enough, I'll go with that Moogmodule.Back to Mojo, this was the readers' Top 10 Dylan 60s LPs this month......

1. Highway 61 Revisited2. Freewheelin'3. Bringing It All Back Home4. Blonde on Blonde5. 'Albert Hall'6. Another Side7. 1st LP8. The Times They Are A-Changin'9. John Wesley Harding (not as good as his debut? OK!)10. Nashville Skyline

I take a certain pride that my favourite Dylan LP (of all, not just the 60s) was last! I must be doing something right.Remember this was the mag that omitted 'Prophets' and 'Unicorn' from a Marc Bolan list in preference to his dire later stuff, and, if memory serves, Fairport Convention's first 2 LPs from their Top 10.

Fair enough, I'll go with that Moogmodule.Back to Mojo, this was the readers' Top 10 Dylan 60s LPs this month......

1. Highway 61 Revisited2. Freewheelin'3. Bringing It All Back Home4. Blonde on Blonde5. 'Albert Hall'6. Another Side7. 1st LP8. The Times They Are A-Changin'9. John Wesley Harding (not as good as his debut? OK!)10. Nashville Skyline

I take a certain pride that my favourite Dylan LP (of all, not just the 60s) was last! I must be doing something right.Remember this was the mag that omitted 'Prophets' and 'Unicorn' from a Marc Bolan list in preference to his dire later stuff, and, if memory serves, Fairport Convention's first 2 LPs from their Top 10.

That's such a great group of albums. I'd rate John Wesley Harding higher. Always loved that record.

Fair enough, I'll go with that Moogmodule.Back to Mojo, this was the readers' Top 10 Dylan 60s LPs this month......

1. Highway 61 Revisited2. Freewheelin'3. Bringing It All Back Home4. Blonde on Blonde5. 'Albert Hall'6. Another Side7. 1st LP8. The Times They Are A-Changin'9. John Wesley Harding (not as good as his debut? OK!)10. Nashville Skyline

I take a certain pride that my favourite Dylan LP (of all, not just the 60s) was last! I must be doing something right.Remember this was the mag that omitted 'Prophets' and 'Unicorn' from a Marc Bolan list in preference to his dire later stuff, and, if memory serves, Fairport Convention's first 2 LPs from their Top 10.

My top:

1. Live at 'Royal Albert Hall' '662. John Wesley Harding3. Blonde on Blonde4. Highway 61 Revisited5. Basement Tapes6. Bringing It All Back Home7. Live at the Philharmonic Hall '648. Freewheelin'9. Another Side10. Nashville Skyline11. Times They Are A-Changin'12. Bob Dylan

It might because I'm ever so slightly happy over Chelsea losing at home to Sunderland, but I'm seriously thinking of trimming my Dylan collection from Nashville Skyline, John Wesley Harding and Another Side of Bob Dylan to.....erm.....Nashville Skyline. I mean, when EVERYONE loves Bob Dylan (see also David Bowie), where's the fun?

Logged

nimrod

Bob Dylan has the honour of giving the worst big name concert Ive even been too, I was on holiday in the UK in the late nineties and a friend dragged me to Gmex to see him for nearly a hundred pounds.He never said a word and changed the melody of nearly every song, only the words stayed the same (ish)

I thought it was absolute crap, no relationship with the audience or attempt to create one at all

Donovan & Neil Young were a thousand times better when I saw them (Donovan being the best)

I can understand that Kevin. When I've heard some of his live recordings I often think that he wasn't really trying very hard and that paying big bucks to hear that would p*ss a person off! But from my perspective, as a CD or album buyer, I feel I've gotten my money's worth. I just really enjoy the way he has with words and his playing too.

Logged

Kelley

In my life I've loved them all

nimrod

I can understand that Kevin. When I've heard some of his live recordings I often think that he wasn't really trying very hard and that paying big bucks to hear that would p*ss a person off! But from my perspective, as a CD or album buyer, I feel I've gotten my money's worth. I just really enjoy the way he has with words and his playing too.

yeah no doubting his talent at all

when I saw Donovan he just sat cross legged in the front/middle of the stage and told little stories interspersed with songs, when you see him live he is a great singer with such a pure voice, him and an acoustic guitar is all that's needed, he was mesmeric.

Bob Dylan has the honour of giving the worst big name concert Ive even been too, I was on holiday in the UK in the late nineties and a friend dragged me to Gmex to see him for nearly a hundred pounds.He never said a word and changed the melody of nearly every song, only the words stayed the same (ish)

I thought it was absolute crap, no relationship with the audience or attempt to create one at all

Donovan & Neil Young were a thousand times better when I saw them (Donovan being the best)

Ive never really liked him since

I had a similar Dylan experience. I caught him in Oz when he toured with Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers as his backing band. The rockier songs he just howled some approximation of the melody. His acoustic set was much better. He sings more softly and usually a bit truer to the original. But there is no sense of performing for an audience. You'd think he couldn't care if we were there or not. So I stick to his recordings which are great. Never want to own a live album though.

Donovan was a much better experience. I saw him at the opera house in 82. Great performer, a stronger voice than sometimes comes over on record and really seems to enjoy the audience interaction. He's very underrated these days.

when I saw Donovan he just sat cross legged in the front/middle of the stage and told little stories interspersed with songs, when you see him live he is a great singer with such a pure voice, him and an acoustic guitar is all that's needed, he was mesmeric.

I'm sure that was a great concert. What a gentle soul; a true embodiment of the sixties' spirit. I'm glad you got to see him.

Dylan's not unique in this casual, carefree delivery of a back catalogue.

The Stones (and Jagger especially) effectively 'put the cue on the rack' in about 1972. It's not about being true to the song any more, it's about being seen from a distance, with a huge logo as a backdrop, a fully-stocked merchandise stall, and getting the live CD (soon to be replaced by the extended, and then the extended deluxe CD) in the shops or on-line as soon as possible.

The clever money is to drop down a division (ironically, the same is true of football - Brentford is a far more enjoyable experience than Chelsea in 2014) and seeing the likes of Donovan etc., or in my case in June, Linda Perhacs. That's where you'll be more likely to see and hear the spirit of the 60s, not at a big football stadium.